Comparison of two techniques for selection of master gutta-percha cone using micro-computed tomography

A critical analysis of research methods and experimental models to study root canal fillings

Canal filling materials and techniques have been one of the most studied topics in Endodontics. A simple search using the mesh term "root canal filling" in PubMed revealed more than 11,000 articles, an impressive number that is much higher than "root canal disinfection" (5,544 articles) or even the popular "root canal preparation" (8,527 articles). The overriding importance attributed to root filling procedures is not merely intuitive. It derived from the appealing relevance given by the appearance of the white lines in common radiographs grounded on retrospective clinical data that had identified the quality of a root filling as one of the major causes of treatment failure (lack of healing). Since the publication of the Washington study, impressive efforts have been made for the release of new materials and techniques, as well as, for the development of a plethora of laboratory methods to assess the quality of root filling procedures. This narrative review aims to address and discuss the most relevant laboratory methods to assess the root canal filling. Since filling quality improvements have not translated into higher success rates, as reported in longitudinal clinical studies, more than to deliver a simple methodology-based review, this paper aims to present an in-depth critical view on the assessment of laboratory methods used to study the filling materials and techniques. Recent data indicate that the long-term dimensional stability/degradation over time of endodontic sealers plays a central role in the treatment outcome. In this context, laboratory methods should be developed focusing on predicting, at least to some degree, the long-term clinical behaviour of root canal fillings, rather than simply ranking different materials or techniques.

Quantification of the tug-back by measuring the pulling force and micro computed tomographic evaluation

Objectives

The aims of this study were to quantify tug-back by measuring the pulling force and investigate the correlation of clinical tug-back pulling force with in vitro gutta-percha (GP) cone adaptation score using micro-computed tomography (µCT).

Materials and Methods

Twenty-eight roots from human single-rooted teeth were divided into 2 groups. In the ProTaper Next (PTN) group, root canals were prepared with PTN, and in the ProFile (PF) group, root canals were prepared using PF (n = 14). The degree of tug-back was scored after selecting taper-matched GP cones. A novel method using a spring balance was designed to quantify the tug-back by measuring the pulling force. The correlation between tug-back scores, pulling force, and percentage of the gutta-percha occupied area (pGPOA) within apical 3 mm was investigated using µCT. The data were analyzed using Pearson's correlation analysis, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey's test.

Results

Specimens with a strong tug-back had a mean pulling force of 1.24 N (range, 0.15–1.70 N). This study showed a positive correlation between tug-back score, pulling force, and pGPOA. However, there was no significant difference in these factors between the PTN and PF groups. Regardless of the groups, pGPOA and pulling force were significantly higher in the specimens with a higher tug-back score (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

The degree of subjective tug-back was a definitive determinant for master cone adaptation in the root canal. The use of the tug-back scoring system and pulling force allows the interpretation of subjective tug-back in a more objective and quantitative manner.